Lep, did you seriously miss the point?

No, your point is to slam Muslims, how can I miss that? Only this time it appears you want to throw in a little intellectual dishonesty with it.


Perhaps I went for too detailed an example for you,

No, but your "analogy" was rather crude and simplistic.

but it was the classic 'shoe on the other foot' gambit. If a similar set of circumstances was foisted upon Muslims,


Actually no, that's not a similar set of circumstances, as I pointed out. A similar set of circumstances would be if they were trying to build a monument to bin Laden in Manhattan. This is how your analogy can work:

After a period of nearly ten years following the tragedy. A group of people of the same religion as the man who caused the tragedy, built a house of worship more than two blocks away from the site of the tragedy.


what would the initial knee jerk reaction be? I know, hard to imagine in that any point in space and time that ever occupied a mosque must, in perpetuity, always remain a mosque. But what of it, ye of the ummah?


It is hard to imagine, since your analogy doesn't work. The question is whether you truly don't know how to form a proper analogy, or whether you purposely and dishonestly attempted to conflate personal responsibility (the actions of bin Laden) with nominally-shared faith (Islam).

I think people who don't share your level of anal tendencies ought to get the point that the analogy need not be precise for the concept to be grasped. And yet, no one has commented.


I commented. Perhaps you don't understand exactly what the purpose of an analogy is.


As to my point, it was to gauge how Muslims would react to a similar situation. This would be another angle from which to answer a question I asked in another thread (related to tolerance) than no one directly commented upon but chose instead to run circles around the question.


I didn't run circles around anything, that's what you do. I pointed out that it wasn't a similar situation, and you have yet to explain precisely how what is going on in NYC, and you're imaginary scenario are similar, or are in any way....wait for it....analogous. You could easily have edited your original attempt in order to conform with what would constitute a proper analogy, akin to what I previously suggested, but you have refused.

I guess I'm still trying to see if discourse is even possible with Islamic types. Forgive me if I offend your open minded sensibilities in the process.


You're not really one to gauge whether discourse is possible with anyone. I rebutted your "tolerance" claptrap, point-by-point several days ago, and you've yet to respond with anything but childishness. You won't even defend your own rants. This last post of yours that I am now responding to, you didn't even take the bat off your shoulder.

http://whyislam.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=26726&PN=5





^ It was there.


Feel free to defend her terrible posts if you wish. At least someone will be defending them.

Your argument is flawed on several levels, although it’s reasonable to acknowledge your first sentence as being accurate. It certainly is true that America and the West in general are far more tolerant of Islamism than islamists are of infidels in islamist majority nations.

Many people have pointed out the absurdity of islamists making impassioned pleas regarding “human rights” and “freedom of religion” in connection with the ground zero mosque. The absurdity is in connection with double standards that islamists embrace. Islamist majority nations are, more often than not, totalitarian theocracies designed to promote Islamism at the expense of competing religions. A component of the objection to the ground zero mosque has centered around islamists demands to rights that islamists explicitly exclude to the infidel. In connection with the rights that a free people (we in the U.S.), hold by way of our Constitution, we certainly have the right to point out the implementation of fascism as it applies to Islamism and the assignment of lesser rights applied to infidels in islamist majority nations. We call that free speech.
Secondly, the U.S. is not a “Christian nation”. As opposed to many islamist majority nations where islam, being the State religion, is forced upon all, the U.S. is a secular nation such that laws are applied without deference to a particular religious affiliation. Ultimately, that’s the issue you are missing.

If you had followed the events over the past weeks you would have noticed that application for building permits is a legal process. That process included review for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. There has been no manufactured legal impediment to the building of the ground zero mosque as there is for competing places of worship in islamist majority nations. The developers of the mosque went through a building permit process common to any entity looking to build a similar facility.

We in the U.S. have a right to public protest. It’s a right included under the precept of freedom of expression. Islamists tend to seethe with anger at such a freedom. In islamist majority nations, competing religions and those attempting protest in furtherance of those religions are dealt with in the harshest of terms. Islamists simply don’t allow for the freedoms we in the U.S. have by way of our Constitution.

Thirdly, and I’m not sure how you missed it, but there is a lot of concern over the sources of funding for the ground zero mosque. Many people (myself included), have concerns regarding the poisonous influence of the Saudi’s. It's when you delve beneath the dishonest civilized veneer that the Saudi/wahhabi present to us as representative of Islamism, and into the sacred texts that are indispensable to the islamist faith--it is then that you encounter its inflexible, virulent hostility to everything and everyone outside of the xenophobic fold of Islamism.

In response to an earlier exposition of the plain truth that Saudis are still teaching their kids to hate and kill the infidel, the kleptotheocracy's American mouthpiece went to great lengths appealing to us to understand that his rapacious, quasi-religious government can only go so far in creating the illusion of pretending not to hate us:
Linked below is a 2006 document released by Freedom House describing the Saudi curricula.

Revised Saudi Government Textbooks Still Demonize Christians, Jews, Non-Wahhabi Muslims and Others

http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=70&release=379

Excerpts include:
“Freedom House's Center for Religious Freedom today released a report analyzing a set of Saudi Ministry of Education textbooks in use during the current academic year in Islamic studies courses for elementary and secondary students. The textbooks promote an ideology of hatred toward people, including Muslims, who do not subscribe to the Wahhabi sect of Islam.”

And:

“However, the report shows that these textbooks:

• Condemn and denigrate the majority of Sunni Muslims who do not follow the Wahhabi understanding of Islam, and call them deviants and descendants of polytheists.

• Condemn and denigrate Shiite and Sufi Muslims' beliefs and practices as heretical and call them "polytheists";

• Command Muslims to "hate" Christians, Jews, "polytheists" and other "unbelievers," including non-Wahhabi Muslims, though, incongruously, not to treat them "unjustly";

• Teach the infamous forgeries, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, as historical fact;

• Teach other conspiracy theories accusing Freemasons, Lions Clubs and Rotary Clubs of plotting to undermine Muslims;

• Teach that "Jews and the Christians are enemies of the [Muslim] believers" and that "the clash" between the two realms is perpetual;

• Instruct students not to "greet," "befriend," "imitate," "show loyalty to," "be courteous to," or "respect" non-believers;

• Assert that the spread of Islam through jihad is a "religious duty;"

• Instruct that "fighting between Muslims and Jews" will continue until Judgment Day, and that the Muslims are promised victory over the Jews in the end;

• Include a map of the Middle East that labels Israel within its pre-1967 borders as "Palestine: occupied 1948."

Lovely, lovely people.

What's really sad is that many Americans are quite likely unaware of the virulently hateful anti-America, anti-Jew, anti-West curricula that are standard in the schools of the Arab/islamist world, let alone worrying about the sincerity of slick apologists like Rauf.

The financial information is starting to appear.(I can't seem to remove the ads. Sorry.)

Most of the major news sites are running the following article. What’s remarkable is just how weird (and sleazy), one of the major players has behaved.

Rift Imperils Ground Zero Mosque

http://news.yahoo.com/s/dailybeast/9670_sharifelgamalandthegroundzeromosque;_ylt=AlZBoWEtXUcDvAgxU_tZwCus0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTRrcXZhM2NoBGFzc2V0A2RhaWx5YmVhc3QvMjAxMDA4MzAvOTY3MF9zaGFyaWZlbGdhbWFsYW5kdGhlZ3JvdW5kemVyb21vc3F1ZQRjY29kZQNtb3N0cG9wdWxhcgRjcG9zAzQEcG9zAzEEcHQDaG9tZV9jb2tlBHNlYwN5bl9oZWFkbGluZV9saXN0BHNsawN0aGVzaGFkb3d5bWE-

Wow, that's marwan's M.O. too :

hey lil' tony...   If it wasn't against my religion I'd suggest you hold a knife and run into it - fortunately these days I'm a pacifist and would not suggest such a thing...
http://www.whyislam.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=21562&PID=476724#476724